Hurricane Sandy: The next climate wake-up call?

How's this for some election-year timing: The East Coast faces the real possibility of taking a battering next week from a “perfect storm” roaring in from the Atlantic — right at the tail end of a campaign in which President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and their debate moderators have all drawn criticism for avoiding discussion of climate change.

The brewing, blustery mess could affect the same region that was already knocked around by this summer's derecho and soaked in 2011 by Hurricane Irene. And it could come just two months after Hurricane Isaac forced the GOP to cancel the first day of its convention in Tampa.

Text Size

This time, the meteorological mayhem would be courtesy of Hurricane Sandy, which is forecast to barrel northward across Jamaica and Cuba during the next 24 hours before slicing toward the Bahamas.

While much of Florida's east coast and the Upper Florida Keys are already under a tropical storm watch, some forecasting models — particularly one from the European weather agency — have hinted that the real trouble could come early next week, after Sandy ceases to be a tropical cyclone. It then could merge with other atmospheric patterns over the Atlantic and possibly get whipsawed back to the U.S. coast, somewhere from Virginia to Maine.

Other models suggest the storm will curve out to sea. But the more dramatic possibility is getting some attention in weather-watching circles.

“What seemed like a fluke of an idea — a hurricane-like system hitting the northeastern U.S. — is gaining credibility,” wrote Weather Channel hurricane forecaster Bryan Norcross in a blog post Wednesday morning. “Originally the European model was on its own with the spectacular but somewhat bizarre idea that Sandy would be injected with jet stream energy and curve back toward New England as a stunningly strong storm. Now one model after the other, including the ensembles, are favoring a swing back toward the East Coast after the storm goes by Cape Hatteras.”

Meteorologists at NOAA's National Hurricane Center near Miami were more cautious, saying it's too early to know whether the scary scenario will play out.

“There are some models that are showing that, and there are also some models that show it will go out east toward the ocean. It’s really too early to tell,” said NHC hurricane specialist Robbie Berg.

Readers' Comments (23)

Glaciers started melting in Yosemite valley 20,000 years ago. I fail to see how politicians and policies present 20,000 years ago could have started the global warming.... These climate people are just plain stupid.

This is the second article on Politico today I've read with a headline that has almost nothing to do with the body of the article. Politico slides even further into the c*r*a*p*p*e*r. If you want to claim the Hurricane has something to do with climate change, might you not want to actual present some data or information that backs that up? Or you just make the statement like throwing a grenade into a septic tank and run away.

Global Warming - the socialist FARCE - WE had glaciers - we had floods - we had droughts and then we had glaciers again - Time marches on but the TINY MIND of those that do not read history - believe Obama and Al Gore - So now we spend all sorts of bucks giving us innefficient, undependable solar and wind power that raises the costs per kwh to 40 - 60 cents a kwh when we could have it for 8 cents. How stupid is Obama, Gore and the EPA - Sounds like VERY STUPID say raw economics.

Another Question - What did the world do when volcanoes were firing off in past years? Was Oregon messy or were they exempted from the EPA? What did Obama say when Crater Lake blew stones over to Montana? Was it due to curly light bulbs not being used?

Environmentalist alarmism is the direct descendant of pagan zealotry, where families in primitive, ignorant cultures were forced to give up their virgin daughters to witch-doctors, who swore that tossing the child into a live volcano would appease the gods. Since that time, Enviro-whackos managed to update the sacrifice into something more lucrative: from virgins, to your money and your freedoms. The only part that remains the same with both these scenarios is the gullibility and stupidity of the dupes who buy the lie.

Frontline last night had a brilliant report on how the extractive industries have used money to hire politicians who will deny that climate change results from fossil fuel - and to defeat otherwise 'conservative' politicians who had the misfortune to believe in science. They have managed to make science a 'liberal' discipline and convince 'conservatives' to deny the obvious.

This morning on the radio I heard a report that fracking is allowing the US to come close to Saudi Arabia's output of oil. Unfortunately, there is growing evidence that fracking causes major environmental problems, including earthquakes. So, it seems that money and powerful industries are willing to literally destroy the earth in order to extract the last drop of oil. When they are done they will walk away and live in domed gated communities while the rest of us crowd onto the last few livable acres.

It seems that many here have bought the lies purchased with the profits of the extractive industries. Talk to me in 5 years; I suspect you'll see things differently.

Frontline last night had a brilliant report on how the extractive industries have used money to hire politicians who will deny that climate change results from fossil fuel - and to defeat otherwise 'conservative' politicians who had the misfortune to believe in science. They have managed to make science a 'liberal' discipline and convince 'conservatives' to deny the obvious.

Enviro-whacko organizations are also "extractive". They use phony, doctored and cherry-picked data to draw money out of the pockets of dupes like you. Televangelists use the same technique, and are just as untrustworthy. No industry source forced the falsification of data "proving" global warming. The smoking gun are the emails confirming the hoax from the very "scientists" we are supposed to believe. And that was just the tip of the iceberg.

This morning on the radio I heard a report that fracking is allowing the US to come close to Saudi Arabia's output of oil. Unfortunately, there is growing evidence that fracking causes major environmental problems, including earthquakes. So, it seems that money and powerful industries are willing to literally destroy the earth in order to extract the last drop of oil. When they are done they will walk away and live in domed gated communities while the rest of us crowd onto the last few livable acres.

If Fracking causes earthqakes, Las Vegas would have had more quakes than San Francisco by this time, due to the decades of underground nuclear tests, which were far more destructive than hydrolic fracking ever could be. Quakes are caused by the shifting of tektonik plates under the various land-masses that used to be (what we refer to it today) the super-continent of Pangea. Localized disturbances are possible, just as they would be for contruction, but that sort of event should not be confused with an earthquake. Spend a little less time watching alarmist broadcasts and a little more time reading.

It seems that many here have bought the lies purchased with the profits of the extractive industries. Talk to me in 5 years; I suspect you'll see things differently.

Right back at you, bub. If the world is still here in five years, prepare to eat some crow.

How dare any of you question our leaders views on climate scam. AL GORE set the standard with his award?? winning movie-- That the British courts have ruled can't be shown to school children until an 80 page disclaimer is read to show all the lies.

Oh so scary and to think if we only would have passed climate change legislation back in 1910 when the NY Slime started fear mongering about this you ****** libs wouldn't have to be nursing on your Al Gore nipples right now.